| Published
September 2006
The
Economics of Digital Photo Sensors
Text and illustrations copyright E.J. Peiker, all rights reserved
Quite frequently, I see written on NatureScapes.Net and many other photography
sites that Canon is ripping off the public with their full sensor cameras
since they cost approximately double what a cropped sensor camera costs.
Having worked in the semiconductor industry for over 23 years, over half
of which was spent in Yield Improvement Engineering, I always realize
that the people who are writing this really do not understand the economics
of semiconductor manufacturing.
The
bane of semiconductor manufacturing is die yield or in our context, sensor
yield. Digital sensors, like all other semiconductor devices are made
on wafers that have a number of sensors printed on them. But only a percentage
of these are good and the rest are scrap. The percentage of good sensors
as their size goes up is reduced dramatically. In the example below, we
have a large sensor being manufactured on a wafer. The wafer has a total
possible yield of 8 good sensors but there are 3 killer defects, depicted
by the black dots so the yield is only 5 good sensors or 60%. Now let’s
say we halved the sensor size on the same wafer with three defects. We
now get 13 of 16 good sensors for a yield of 81.2%.

Figure 1: Wafer on the right with a large sensor and three killer defects
yields 60% while wafer on the right with smaller sensor yields 81%.
Also
note from Figure 1 that if I were to make the size just a little bit smaller,
I could now utilize more of the silicon and improve the yield percentage
even more.
Now
let’s apply this learning to actual Canon camera sensors. I am assuming
for the sake of discussion that Canon manufactures its sensors on 200mm
wafers which is the industry standard although the more advanced manufacturing
lines are transitioning to 300mm wafers. The economic argument, however,
is unchanged. I will be using a wafer manufacturing cost of $1000 which
is a very realistic estimate and likely within 10-15% of the real wafer
cost for these sensors. I am assuming near world class defect densities.
While I don’t know the exact fabrication defect densities for the
Canon sensor line, I can estimate them fairly accurately based on my experience
in the industry. There is very little difference these days in the semiconductor
industry in yields on processes of differing minimum circuit dimensions
so that has been eliminated as a factor.
Without
getting into some very complex formulas in this article, I have calculated
approximately what the yields would be and the associated single good
sensor cost:
| Camera
Sensor |
Area
(mm2) |
Yield/200mm
wafer* |
Sensor
Cost* |
| Full Frame EOS
1Ds Mark II/5D |
864 |
2.6 |
$385 |
| 1.3x Crop EOS
1D Mark IIn |
511 |
13 |
$77 |
| 1.6x Crop EOS
30D |
338 |
29 |
$34 |
| *
Values are an estimate based on semiconductor industry standard
costs |
From
the table above, we see that the full frame sensor costs more than 10
times the amount of a 1.6x sensor even though the actual area is only
2.6 times greater. My assumptions can be dramatically off but the result
will be the same.
In
addition to the dramatic increase in sensor cost with sensor size, other
components of the camera will also cost significantly more. The buffer
memory generally has to be more and often faster or with more channels
from the sensor to the memory to maintain the frame per second rate that
we photographers require. The mirror box is larger and requires more sophisticated
mechanics and electronics operating at tighter tolerances. All of these
add up. Finally, due to the higher cost of manufacturing, and therefore,
the higher retail price, the volume will be lower so there are fewer cameras
to amortize the development cost against which also adds significant cost
to a full frame sensor camera over an otherwise equivalent cropped frame
camera.
With
the above analysis, I hope the reader will gain a better understanding
as to why a full frame sensor camera costs significantly more to manufacture
than a cropped frame sensor camera.

E.J.
Peiker is the Senior Technical Editor at NatureScapes.Net and has been
photographing seriously for over thirty years. For more information on
E.J., please visit his website at www.ejphoto.com.
Feel
free to send your comments on this article to the
at NatureScapes.Net.

All
content on this site is copyrighted material as indicated. Unauthorized
use or reproduction is prohibited.
|